Monday, March 19, 2012

 

Break them down


My latest article in Republica is regarding South Asian trade. The direct Republica link is here. The original unedited version is below.


Intra-regional Trade in South Asia: We Can Do Better

Let me start this article with information that probably only a handful of South Asians know. Before the Second World War, the volume of trade between South Asian countries accounted for 20 percent of world trade. In 1950, that fell to 4 percent. By 1967, it fell further to 2 percent. By 2010, there was a slight improvement—a rise to 5 percent.

This apathy towards intra-regional trade in South Asia has resulted in our region growing at a slower rate than Sub-Saharan Africa. A decade ago, if anyone had told us that Sub-Saharan Africa would outpace our region in economic growth in 2012, we would have laughed. Yet, that is precisely what has happened. According to The Economist, in the ten years between 2002 and 2012, Sub-Saharan Africa grew faster than South Asia in “all” of those years, and grew faster than Asia in eight of those years.

When compared to regional trading blocs like the EU, North America and MERCOSUR, the SAARC region is inept in facilitating trade among its members. Even the African trading bloc COMESA (Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa) has made more progress than our SAFTA has ever made, and has lifted many out of poverty through trade. So, what happened to us in the last sixty years? How did we go from a “global force” in trade to become a mere footnote?

There are many bottlenecks in facilitating trade in our region. A dominant political inertia has meant that our regional politicians are vehemently protective of their domestic industries. This has bought them short-term political popularity, but has hurt the economic growth of the region. The leaders in European countries realized a need for a unified market where labor and capital moved freely so that significant gains could be made from deregulation of trade barriers. However, our leaders clearly have no intention of proposing and negotiating such arrangements in our region.

Even after reading about the harmful effects of import substitution in our economics textbooks, our leaders revel in participating in such practices. All South Asian countries maintain sensitive lists of products on which there are either tariffs or import restrictions. To garner votes, our politicians provide subsidies to the labor-populated economic sectors like agriculture. These discrepancies, that our governments in the region have been creating, are the main reason why illegal cross-border trade and informal (underground) markets are flourishing in South Asia.

The members of SAARC, despite what the name suggests, are anything but cooperative when it comes to removing the trade barriers. An import quota system imposed by India since 2006 has all but destroyed the Sri Lankan vanaspati ghee industry. The irony is that the very reason why Sri Lankan vanaspati ghee industry grew was because of initial heavy capital investments by Indian investors. And, now, all that investment, cooperation and goodwill has been endangered due to India’s insistence on the quota on the product. 

There are many non-tariff barriers (NTBs) that hinder our regional trade. The highways linking South Asian markets are poor, to say the least. Letter of Credit (LoC) issued by Indian banks is not accepted in Pakistan, and vice versa. And, then there’s the vigilante factor. Indian custom law states that tea shipments from Nepal need to be tested only once every six months. Yet, last year, an Indian border agent refused to let Nepali tea shipments to pass through the Kakarbhitta checkpoint in Eastern Nepal because he insisted on testing those shipments “himself”. The insistence continued even after Nepali exporters showed him the test “certificate” given by the Indian government.

In light of all these problems, our region cannot accrue any gains from trade if we do not work towards addressing and solving these problems. In this regard, the media can play a significant role. The media should highlight significant trade agreements made by, and between, the member states of this region. For example, the BIPPA that Nepal and India recently signed. Our media should portray such regional dialogues and facilitations in a positive light. Yes, the details of the agreements could be debatable, but the importance should be given to the fact that the “dialogues” and “agreements” are happening in the region. The debatable details can always be fine-tuned, changed, or ironed out.

Also, the markets in our region should be interconnected. Transport infrastructure such as roads, highways and ports should be accessible to one another, should be well maintained, and safeguarded by mutual cooperation. SAARC regional trade will receive a boost if India allows Nepal and Bangladesh to use the Indian roads for a direct trade, without having to load and unload goods in the Nepal—India and India—Bangladesh border points.

Like the developed world, we should integrate our equity markets, too. The bond markets in South Asia are very poorly developed, and they are not integrated. We should make efforts towards such integration because it would help the member states gain valuable access to capital. For example: if we had a regional bond market today, an entrepreneur or a business in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka or Pakistan could borrow and use the excess liquidity from the Nepali financial market. In today’s business climate, such initiatives are not only desirable, but also necessary.

Our region should also learn from the “China syndrome”. Essentially, it means that salary, income and standard of living also grow when an economy grows. Increasingly, the Chinese workers are seeking better and high-paying opportunities than that offered by manufacturing and agriculture. To counter such problems from ever occurring in our region, we should have a regional cooperation where labor flows freely between our countries in the same manner as goods and services. A smooth flow of intra-regional labor ensures that no industry in any of the member countries will suffer from shortage of labor—quantity or quality wise.

Finally, it is a fact that most trade agreements done in, and between, South Asian countries do not guarantee consumer rights because the agreements focus on the supply-side of trade. Because of this, protectionism reigns high in the region, which in turn marginalizes consumer welfare. In addition, there is a distinct lack of awareness among consumers in our region about what gains the consumers can make from various intra-regional trade agreements. The media, therefore, needs to play an advocacy role in the region to highlight, and ensure, such gains to consumers.

Labels: , , ,


Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]





<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]